Flying Dutchmen
Active between 2001 and 2002
Latest results
| -3 hrs | MiDiaN | 0:45.56 | Camaro |
| -5 hrs | Duplode | 0:47.77 | Camaro |
| -5 hrs | HerrNove | 0:48.18 | Camaro |
| -7 hrs | Duplode | 0:47.98 | Mercedes DTM |
| -1 day | Duplode | 0:48.12 | Mercedes DTM |
Shoutbox
- HerrNove
- Belated happy birthday, @KyLiE! /// Don't worry, @Duplode , I'm at the end of my resources, and I hate that final tunnel too much to polish my time till the last twentieth of second. But I hope to have scared you for a couple of minutes :-)
- KyLiE
- Thanks @Argammon and @Duplode!
- Argammon
-
Happy birthday, @Igor and @KyLiE!
- Duplode
-
@AyrtonC The Mercedes does feel like a good car to try!
0:48.12
- Duplode
-
Happy birthday, @Igor and @KyLiE!
- HerrNove
-
The final tunnel entrance remains a mystery for me...
0:49.06
- HerrNove
- Hello @AyrtonC 👋
- Ayrton C
-
Hello!
0:58.65 A
- Duplode
- @Argammon That's correct. Another way of putting it: a dual-way switching lap is a lap that needs the dual-way switching bug in order to be valid. This discussion in the ZCT280 Forum thread is also relevant: https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?msg=95409
- Cas
- From what we discussed in Telegram, I understand @Argammon means like say you take path A, then at some point, you cross or temporarily drive on path B before returning to path A, but it's not DWS because if path B hadn't been there of if it had had a hole in that section that you had gone through, the replay would've still been valid. I think the idea of imagining that the other path doesn't exist to tell if the rule is respected is a very good way to make it objective!
© Zak McKracken & dreadnaut, 2001–2025